USA health system... umm... what the hell?!

Recommended Videos

Mouse One

New member
Jan 22, 2011
328
0
0
It's not just uninsured people who'd benefit. The majority of bankruptcies in America are because of catastrophic illnesses, and in roughly 75% of those cases, they had insurance.

Private insurance? Watch as the insurance company pours over your paperwork to see if you made a technical error when you applied, so they can terminate your policy. It's an industry practice known as recission.

Or perhaps you simply can't pay for insurance what with being unable to work as much or at all, thanks to your fight with a life threatening illness/injury.

No, you can't just "drop by the emergency room" for chemo.

Or perhaps you have a spouse who gets insurance through work. Hope they don't lose their job, or perhaps the company just drops its insurance benefit in favor of a HSA. Don't get me wrong, HSAs are great for things like your kid's braces. But it ain't going to do it for a hospital stay of any length.

Let's not forget the random denials of coverage, done with expectation that many won't (or just don't have the energy) to contest.

I've walked that mile in those shoes as my wife fought cancer. I've been continuously employed since I joined the Navy, thank you very much, and my current job had a "good" PPO plan. Savings were a bit tight, what with her being unable to work and me taking unpaid leave to take care of her (it was either that or hire someone to) Various expenses and non-covered items added up to about $20,000. No, really. Talking to other people who've had a family member fight that battle, that's about right. My co-workers started a charity fund for her (complete with a Triathlon), and bankruptcy was avoided. Words can't express my gratitude, but why the heck should they have had to do that in a First World country?

I'm sick of the "freeloader" sound bite. Tell you what, go down to the cancer ward at your local hospital and talk to people there. Ask them how many might declare bankruptcy. Then look them in the eyes and call them freeloaders.

Why don't we see people up in arms about socialized police and fire departments? Because there are some things that are best not given a profit motive.
 

Liudeius

New member
Oct 5, 2010
442
0
0
Chevy235 said:
Liudeius said:
Well obviously Obama-care-socialism-HITLER-health system didn't pass.
He wanted to have a panel of doctors vote on whether or not to kill everyone over the age of 50, duh.

Yeah, unfortunately so long as Fox is still around, the US will never do anything other than progress further to a third world status.
(Fox is an absurdly biased news organization that lies to the extreme, uses false video footage, and promotes radicalism.)
FTFY
I never said MSNBC had no biased, but if you don't admit that Fox is biased to the point of radicalism, you sir are an idiot.

However if anyone want's to see Fox New's effect on the general populace of the US, I would recommend they read any post on this thread by Chevy.
 

Godhead

Dib dib dib, dob dob dob.
May 25, 2009
1,692
0
0
Can't Allison, take this to court or something?

OT: Our healthcare system, kinda sucks but better than no healthcare at all.
 

Laxman9292

New member
Feb 6, 2009
457
0
0
Zhukov said:
So, anyway... is there a point to all this text? Well... no, not really. I guess I'm just a bit surprised that such a system would exist in a nation that likes to hold itself up as the epitome of the developed world, and not entirely without reason. Also, I would really like to hear from some of the many American escapists. What do you people think of this system? Do you want to defend it? Is there something I am missing here?
We hold ourselves up as that(we really don't think we are the best, but for some reason the rest of the world thinks we do... I guess they just like America-bashing) because if you want people to do things for you, then you have to pay for it. If the surgery, materials, time used by the surgeons and other medical personnel, add up to $20,000 dollars then that's how much it costs. If the surgery means that much to you then pay it. Or get insurance, which has a few conditions before you sign up (like no preexisting conditions or whatever sort of agreement you work out with them), and if those conditions are satisfactory to you then get the insurance. If it isn't then don't. But don't get yourself involved in an agreement that you voluntarily signed and then ***** about it when your preexisting condition isn't covered. Work it out beforehand or maybe read your own agreement before signing. It isn't like these things are hidden, you can easily find out what is and isn't covered. And if you decide that the insurance isn't worth it then you better have the money to pay for yourself, don't expect people to invest $20,000 dollars worth of equipment, space, and time, into your surgery if you can't compensate them for it.
 

BlackWidower

New member
Nov 16, 2009
783
0
0
I'm proud to be a Canadian,
where at least I know I have healthcare.
And I wont forget the men who fought
Who gave me that...free healthcare.

I'm sure I could write more, but I don't need to, because my healthcare is free.

But I think you buried the lead there. Her care was rejected because it's a "pre-existing condition." What is? Having a shoulder!? It was a shoulder injury! She wasn't born with that!
 

Therumancer

Citation Needed
Nov 28, 2007
9,908
0
0
Zhukov said:
(The dreaded wall-o-text lurks below. I tried to keep it as concise and readable as possible. No, really, I did.)

Let me make one thing clear right off the bat. I am not from the US. I'm Australian. Therefore, I have no personal stake in this. I am not really trying to make any particular argument, one way or another. My interest in this matter is mostly...well, I suppose the most appropriate term would be "anthropological".

Just try to bear that in mind when you respond. Please.

So... I'm guessing that everyone here has heard about the medical dramas involving the artist of the Escapist's own Extra Credits show [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/111418-Extra-Credits-Artist-Amazed-at-Fan-Support]. Long story short, she sustained injury to her shoulders. Quite a lot of injury. If untreated, she could lose the use of her arms. (Just take a brief moment to dwell on the various delightful implications of not being able to use your own arms.) Now, in order to receive the required treatments, she had to come up with a large amount of money. Somewhere around $20,000 USD. No, that's not a typo. Yes, we're talking one thousand dollars, twenty times over. And just to make it all better, her private medical insurance refused to pay out. (What's that? An insurance company weaseling out of having to pony up the cash? Well, I never... who would have thought, eh?)

Luckily they managed to organize a lightning fundraiser that resulted in a ridiculous amount of money being generated in a ridiculously short time [http://rockethub.com/projects/2165-extra-credits]. It was all rather heartwarmingly awesome.

But hang on one second. Let me just back up a few sentences. A person was expected to produce $20,000 in order to receive medical treatment for an injury that would prevent her from earning a living and drastically reduce her quality of life.

America, just... what the fuck?

See, here in Australia, what with our evil communist government health system, we occasionally like to tell silly campfire horror stories about the state of health care in the US. Y'know, tales about that terrible place where you can get hit by a car and hospital staff will refuse to put you back together unless you throw wads of money or medical insurance forms at them. I never really knew what to think about these stories. And, quite frankly, I didn't particularly care because hey, why would I? That mess is an entire Pacific Ocean away. But this whole business with Extra Credits and the injury of the Pink Bean seems to suggest that those stories were disquieting close to the truth.

Some months back there was talk of the system being changed under the Obama administration. Last I heard it was still in the early stages, it seemed to mostly consist of a lot of people running around yelling something about socialism. Did that end up going anywhere?

So, anyway... is there a point to all this text? Well... no, not really. I guess I'm just a bit surprised that such a system would exist in a nation that likes to hold itself up as the epitome of the developed world, and not entirely without reason. Also, I would really like to hear from some of the many American escapists. What do you people think of this system? Do you want to defend it? Is there something I am missing here?

...

PS. If anyone is interested, I could give a brief summary of the far-from-perfect Australian system for purposes of comparison. I was going to do it here, but this is already too long.

PPS. Oh yeah, and another thing. I know it's a bit tricky given the nature of the topic, but can we please try to keep the USA-bashing within reasonable bounds? Yeah, I know they pull some immensely stupid shit on occasion, but, well... don't we all?

It's a little more complicated than a lot of people think.

For starters I will say that for all of it's problems, any first world nation complaining about it's health care becomes subjective very quickly. For 90% of the human population through the second and third world there isn't much of a health care system in place at all. The majority of humans actually living in places like Africa, Asia, and India. While some of those places do have huge, modern cities, countries like India and a lot of Asia are known for having situations where you might have a modern city in one place, and another area a hundred miles away that might as well be in the middle ages. This is one of the reasons why aid is such a big deal when disasters hit those places, they simply don't have the resources to deal with their problems for the population in general, never mind when something really bad happens. Even the worst of the first world countries is lightyears ahead of the second and third world.

That said, a point that a lot of people seem to miss when it comes to health care is that the world depends on the US and it's capitalist system of health care to support their own systems. Like it or not drug companies, and doctors are out there to make money. People develop these cures, surgical techniques, medical devices, and other things with the intention of being able to sell them. Most of the profit to be made from these developments comes from the USA because we're one of the increasingly few countries that allows the medical industry to operate in a "for profit" fashion.

What this means is that the abillity to make money off the American market (the biggest in the world) is what keeps things profitable for those developing the technology and techniques. Other nations with socialized systems are able to get away with what they do largely because the innovators have a major market (the biggest one) to recoup their expenses and make money off of.

If the US was to socialize medicine like some other countries have, the medical industry would be crushed, and that would mean far less innovation in general. Even developments outside of the US, come to the US in a way that makes money for the creators. Companies like Pfizers, Merck, and others aren't US companies but rely on the US to make their big profits. Socialized "the goverment pays what it things is fair" policies might be great for the people but hardly serve the interests of business, but like it or not without business and the billions of dollars spent in R&D, especially SAFE R&D (which makes things more expensive) we'd have fare inferior medical technology than we do now.


Politically speaking this isn't a popular talking point, but it figures into a lot of the thought processes on the whole medical situation. A lot of people in authority DO realize that the world's medical community right now is being propped up by the US, and that includes the US itself. We socialize health care in the US to the extent of other nations, it's going to backfire, and so so in such a way that it's going to lower the quality of health care over a period of time through the entire world.

It's not a situation where there would be some kind of immediate apocolypse if the US socialized health care, things don't work that way. It would be gradual, with less innovations being made, big drug and medical companies downsizing, and similar things. There are philanthropists out there, but your not going to have teams of billionaires throwing fortunes into developing things that they will never see a return on.

Overall, the entire situation is one where the US can't just socialize medicine here, despite the fact that it's strangling us as a society. The whole insurance system that helps balance out the lack of socialized medicine is causing a lot of problems itself, as you wind up having TWO layers of greedy bastards (the medical industry, and the insurance industry) double teaming your average citizen.

To solve the problem ultimatly requires efforts on an international level, which basically means that a lot of these socialized systems need to wind up paying more money into the whole international medical system one way or another. It's not what the goverments/people think is fair so much as the medical companies and innovators seeing a return on their investments. Basically the big socialist nations need to become more capitalist here, and the US needs to become more socialist... rather than the current situation where the US pretty much winds up providing all the major profits in medicine while others reap the benefits and pretty much go "Lawl, the US health care system sucks".


I know many people are going to disagree with what I'm saying, because heck it's not a popular point, but this is pretty much where we are now. A lot was said about it when Obama was trying to rehaul the system.

As far as what happened with Allison from Extra Credits, I've been worried about something like that happening to me (being disabled, and dependant on social security and medicaid from when I was working... with medicaid not exactly being the best method of coverage).

Oh and that's another point I will sort of make, in the US we *DO* have the medicare and medicaid system. For everything that I said above, it's important to note that the elderly and disabled *DO* get some coverage from the goverment. What's more most (but not all) hospitals in the US receive federal funding, which also means that they can't refuse to treat people based on their lack of abillity to pay. In most parts of the US, it's not likely that you are going to be left to die without treatment. Most of the horror stories about that have to deal with hospitals that DON'T receive public monies and are 100% privatly managed and funded. That can be a touchy subject at times, but they represent an exception rather than the rule. In a few areas like Florida, there have been cases where people who are injured have been unable to find a publically funded hospital before they succumbed to injuries, but it's also important to understand the situation that spawned that. In Florida all of the older folks down there create a situation where if they don't pay/have coverage there is almost no chance of the hospitals recouping the losses. The same can be said of the international tourists going to Disney World and such, those guys get injured and leave the area (or the country) and again, getting paid at all can be an issue. In those enviroments federal monies probably wouldn't be sufficient to keep them afloat, which is why they don't take it. Someone has to pay all those doctors, buy and maintain the equipment, etc...

Of course this is just a side point to the overall TL:DR type rant I've just gone on.
 

Tim Mazzola

New member
Dec 27, 2010
192
0
0
Yep. We suck. Hell, everybody HERE that I know hates the healthcare system here. I'm thousands of dollars in medical debt myself. If I didn't get the surgery, I would have either suffocated on my own uvula or, if that didn't kill me first, slowly died from a brain infection. Now I'm financially crippled for life, though. I don't know which I'd have preferred.
 

DracoSuave

New member
Jan 26, 2009
1,685
0
0
headshotcatcher said:
Well durr, you have to pick exactly what you want to be insured for, it's cheaper for you.

Unless something goes wrong, so you either pay TONS of money for private insurance or pay a small amount and then you get angry when you do sustain an injury..
So, let me get this straight... health insurance in America works perfectly so long as you don't... get... sick?!?

I'm just saying, only in America does the words 'pre-existing condition' mean you can't get it fixed. That's the biggest problem right there.
 

menhir

New member
Jun 15, 2007
22
0
0
Laxman9292 said:
Zhukov said:
So, anyway... is there a point to all this text? Well... no, not really. I guess I'm just a bit surprised that such a system would exist in a nation that likes to hold itself up as the epitome of the developed world, and not entirely without reason. Also, I would really like to hear from some of the many American escapists. What do you people think of this system? Do you want to defend it? Is there something I am missing here?
We hold ourselves up as that(we really don't think we are the best, but for some reason the rest of the world thinks we do... I guess they just like America-bashing) because if you want people to do things for you, then you have to pay for it. If the surgery, materials, time used by the surgeons and other medical personnel, add up to $20,000 dollars then that's how much it costs. If the surgery means that much to you then pay it. Or get insurance, which has a few conditions before you sign up (like no preexisting conditions or whatever sort of agreement you work out with them), and if those conditions are satisfactory to you then get the insurance. If it isn't then don't. But don't get yourself involved in an agreement that you voluntarily signed and then ***** about it when your preexisting condition isn't covered. Work it out beforehand or maybe read your own agreement before signing. It isn't like these things are hidden, you can easily find out what is and isn't covered. And if you decide that the insurance isn't worth it then you better have the money to pay for yourself, don't expect people to invest $20,000 dollars worth of equipment, space, and time, into your surgery if you can't compensate them for it.
Are you American? That's not the American system.

The American system will pay $20,000 for livesaving emergency care, even if the person receiving it can't afford it. We won't let people die if they come to an emergency room with a life-threatening condition.

But if that same person could get livesaving preventative care for $10,000*, we wouldn't pay for it. So if you take the wishy-washy American philosophy where you won't pay until the person is dying, but you won't let them die, you get the worst of both worlds.

The US doesn't have a coverage problem, really. We have a price problem. If prices went down, more people could afford coverage and would receive preventative care, and since preventative care costs less than emergency care overall costs would fall in tandem with overall prices, and the coverage problem would be solved in the process. Socialized medicine can be used to control costs, and there are ways to control costs and also keep our privatized system. But preventative care is the key to it all, specifically paying for preventative care. Someone needs to pay for it or we are headed off the cliff, so if only the government is prepared to pay then fuck it, have the government pay.

*Even if there is no up front cost savings from preventative care over emergency care, the improved health of the patient allows them to be more economically productive.
 

T8B95

New member
Jul 8, 2010
444
0
0
I live in Canada, so I get to look just south of the border and laugh at those foolish Americans paying thousands of dollars for routine operations.
 

LITE992

New member
Jun 18, 2011
287
0
0
The United States is too right-wing. They are so far right that anything that brings them even remotely close to the middle of the politcal spectrum or to the left is referred to as socialism. The people are blowing the whole thing out of proportion when they call any leftist a socialist. But anyway, the war in the Middle East they're fighting costs 3 times more than a healthcare reform. Step it up, America.
 

Laxman9292

New member
Feb 6, 2009
457
0
0
menhir said:
Laxman9292 said:
Zhukov said:
So, anyway... is there a point to all this text? Well... no, not really. I guess I'm just a bit surprised that such a system would exist in a nation that likes to hold itself up as the epitome of the developed world, and not entirely without reason. Also, I would really like to hear from some of the many American escapists. What do you people think of this system? Do you want to defend it? Is there something I am missing here?
We hold ourselves up as that(we really don't think we are the best, but for some reason the rest of the world thinks we do... I guess they just like America-bashing) because if you want people to do things for you, then you have to pay for it. If the surgery, materials, time used by the surgeons and other medical personnel, add up to $20,000 dollars then that's how much it costs. If the surgery means that much to you then pay it. Or get insurance, which has a few conditions before you sign up (like no preexisting conditions or whatever sort of agreement you work out with them), and if those conditions are satisfactory to you then get the insurance. If it isn't then don't. But don't get yourself involved in an agreement that you voluntarily signed and then ***** about it when your preexisting condition isn't covered. Work it out beforehand or maybe read your own agreement before signing. It isn't like these things are hidden, you can easily find out what is and isn't covered. And if you decide that the insurance isn't worth it then you better have the money to pay for yourself, don't expect people to invest $20,000 dollars worth of equipment, space, and time, into your surgery if you can't compensate them for it.
Are you American? That's not the American system.

The American system will pay $20,000 for livesaving emergency care, even if the person receiving it can't afford it. We won't let people die if they come to an emergency room with a life-threatening condition.

But if that same person could get livesaving preventative care for $10,000*, we wouldn't pay for it. So if you take the wishy-washy American philosophy where you won't pay until the person is dying, but you won't let them die, you get the worst of both worlds.

The US doesn't have a coverage problem, really. We have a price problem. If prices went down, more people could afford coverage and would receive preventative care, and since preventative care costs less than emergency care overall costs would fall in tandem with overall prices, and the coverage problem would be solved in the process. Socialized medicine can be used to control costs, and there are ways to control costs and also keep our privatized system. But preventative care is the key to it all, specifically paying for preventative care. Someone needs to pay for it or we are headed off the cliff, so if only the government is prepared to pay then fuck it, have the government pay.

*Even if there is no up front cost savings from preventative care over emergency care, the improved health of the patient allows them to be more economically productive.
The point being lifesaving. What in this situation is lifesaving? In the strictest sense, her life will not end simply because of a torn shoulder. Therefore, it doesn't qualify as a life threatening injury nor would operating on it be considered life saving preventative care. The US doesn't have a coverage problem, it has a problem of people not understanding how insurance works. Either that or people aren't reading their policies before agreeing to them and then bitching about them after the fact.
 

CM156_v1legacy

Revelation 9:6
Mar 23, 2011
3,997
0
0
Mezmer said:
Everyone deserves coverage. Except no one is really willing to pay for it. I swear to god, I have no idea why people are so deathly afraid of raising taxes in this country. IT'S HOW LITERALLY EVERYTHING GETS PAID FOR. And the rich have absolutely no leg to stand on. Shut up, if you're worth more than $10 million dollars, you're never going to poor, your money makes more money than you could ever possibly spend it, and it's your duty as a citizen to help your countrymen. You know, it's a very basic concept we're taught to do at a very young age: Share. I will never understand the irrational behavior that is greed.
Let me tell you a little story.

My brother once saved up all of his money and bought a ball. He brought it to school and would play with it with his friends. However, the teacher saw this, and decided that everyone should get a chance to play with the ball. For the next few days, my brother got next to no time to be able to use what he had earned. And the people who used it were not at all kind with it either. The next week, he didn't bring the ball back. So rather then a few people getting to play with it, no one did. Now, would you call my brother greedy? Or would you say that he was in the right for not sharing what he had earned because it was done so by force? Me? I think what he did was right.

Let me ask you something, if you could work for 6 months of the year, and take the rest off and earn only 10% less then you did if you worked year round, which would you choose? I mean, I don't think that gives people much of a reason to want to work more. But hey, that's just me.

I want people to get health care, I just don't think that raising taxes on the rich is the best way to do it. Perhaps reform medical malpractace and put damage caps back in.
 

Mouse One

New member
Jan 22, 2011
328
0
0
Laxman9292 said:
if you want people to do things for you, then you have to pay for it. If the surgery, materials, time used by the surgeons and other medical personnel, add up to $20,000 dollars then that's how much it costs. If the surgery means that much to you then pay it. Or get insurance, which has a few conditions before you sign up (like no preexisting conditions or whatever sort of agreement you work out with them), and if those conditions are satisfactory to you then get the insurance.
Not sure if the 20 grand is pulled from my post or not, but yeah, that's how much it my wife's fight with cancer cost AFTER insurance. Which was United Healthcare through my job, and believe it or not, relatively good insurance. The actual costs were in the hundreds of thousands of dollars.

By the way, if she hadn't been married to me, she would have been uninsurable. She'd had cancer before, and had gotten rejected by pretty much every insurance company out there. That's pretty much all it takes. Insurance companies don't want a bad risk. Cuts into their profits.

BTW, I was paying about $850 a month for our COBRA. Another place the money went.

Even if we buy into the idea that anyone who gets a serious disease should go bankrupt, many ill people can't get or can't afford insurance. Institute of Medicine and the Urban Institute estimates that in 2006, roughly 22,000 people died due to lack of adequate insurance.

Funny thing is, it costs more money the way things are currently. Preventive care will discover many ailments when they can be treated easily, avoiding costly hospital bills. Oh, and fewer people die, if that matters.
 

MakerOfRoads

New member
Aug 19, 2009
166
0
0
I want to jump on the bandwagon and bash the US too! Come on guys, lets all make fun of how fat the people are there and how none of them have any class or the fact that 100% of the population is stupid bible thumping extremists. That'll be fun, right?

I read most of the first post. I read enough to know that most of it, while having a plausible and seemingly well thought out argument, fails immediately for one aspect.

"I'm not from the US."

"What the fuck US?!"

As the gentleman before me noted (Therumancer), its not as simple as most people think. It can't be fixed by simply getting off your butt and asking someone politely for this or that. The stereotype of the average american sitting in his trailer park eating hotpockets and watching wrestling, the idea that that's the average everyday american, is ridiculous. Sure we have those people in our country, but they are at least the vocal minority.

Most people don't understand how hard it is to get anything changed here if you make less than $2 mil/year. I've written my state senator, my representatives, I've picketed state capitals, I've spent considerable sums of my own money to try and get things changed. For what? So the people in the building to have the inconvenience of having to close their windows for a week or so, or close the curtains or risk having to see one of the unwashed masses outside.

The simple fact is, there is nothing that we can do unless we do so in a sufficiently large enough group, and I can tell you from first hand experience organizing things like this, its next to impossible to get that many people to agree on something.

Most of this debate/discussion is nothing more than mental masturbation. It would be great to see something done about this. A good number of people get screwed over because of this commonly. But speculating on the nature of an issue like this isn't going to do anything.

/angry rant.

I don't mean to be a dick about this, its just a little frustrating from my point of view.
 

coolkirb

New member
Jan 28, 2011
429
0
0
Health Care is complicated as what is and is not covered allways causes debate, for example I live in Ontario, oral and eye care are not covered but abortions and sex changes are. Now their are legitmate reasons why they should/should not be covered. In Ontario I Think about %50 of all tax money goes into health care and thus it can be expensive but people live a good life style so its not hurting me to bad even with the 13% hst
 

menhir

New member
Jun 15, 2007
22
0
0
Laxman9292 said:
The point being lifesaving. What in this situation is lifesaving? In the strictest sense, her life will not end simply because of a torn shoulder. Therefore, it doesn't qualify as a life threatening injury nor would operating on it be considered life saving preventative care. The US doesn't have a coverage problem, it has a problem of people not understanding how insurance works. Either that or people aren't reading their policies before agreeing to them and then bitching about them after the fact.
Fair enough, the US system would never under any circumstances pay for the shoulder surgery without insurance. But, preventative care does save a great deal of money in this case. If the condition were allowed to deteriorate until she lost the use of both arms, how productive would she be for the rest of her life? It's fair to recoup the costs of the medical care out of the future productivity saved by the care, and since she did get the care she needed it is not an example of failure in the system, but it does show how counter-productive it can be to treat medical care like other goods (pay now or no care.)
 

Imp_Emissary

Mages Rule, and Dragons Fly!
Legacy
May 2, 2011
2,315
1
43
Country
United States
Hero in a half shell said:
I can honestly say my favourite thing about living in the U.K. is our N.H.S. I am twenty two, have nearly every tooth in my head filled, have a half crown and two extractions, and I never paid a penny. I have terrible eyesight, and I have glasses, but the only thing I needed to pay for were frames. The lens, appointments, etc. were absolutely and gloriously free. I have been to the hospital several times, for stitches in various parts of my body (mainly my head) and never had to pay a thing. I have never broken a bone, but if I did, guess what? I wouldn't have to pay a thing. I am just now finishing my education, so some of the more specialist things I may have to pay for in the future, but for now, Mister NHS and I have had a wonderful relationship.
:( Lucky!
This year I had my 4 wisdom teeth removed and the bill was over $600! Oh, and that's after the insurance!
At age 18 I got a pair of glasses for just reading. Over $170! You are lucky
 

DracoSuave

New member
Jan 26, 2009
1,685
0
0
Laxman9292 said:
don't expect people to invest $20,000 dollars worth of equipment, space, and time, into your surgery if you can't compensate them for it.
It's called your fricken taxes, dude. If your taxes aren't getting you quality health care, OR getting you a proper government watchdog so that when you get sick health insurance actually does what it's there to do rather than abandon you because you didn't take the superplus plan...

then what the hell is your tax money going to anyways?
 

Riddle78

New member
Jan 19, 2010
1,104
0
0
Here's how it works in the Great White North...

The government insurance plan takes a percentage from your pay,and puts it into an accout that can only be spent from to pay for plan-covered medical expenses. Simple,and easy. That's what I understand,anyway.

Public health FTW.